The Ministry of Human Resource Development consists of two departments: (i) school education and literacy, and (ii) higher education.  In 2017-18, the Ministry has been allocated Rs 79,686 crore, the fourth highest allocation among all Ministries.  This note presents the trends in expenditure, and discusses some of the issues related to the education sector.

The Department of School Education and Literacy under the Ministry is broadly responsible for education imparted between the ages of 6 to 18 years, i.e., school education. 

• Elementary education is a fundamental right imparted up to class 8 for children between 6-14 years of age. The government is mandated to provide elementary education to all children under the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009. 
• Secondary education is imparted between classes 9 to 12 for children between 14-18 years of age.

In 2017-18, the Department has been allocated Rs 46,356 crore, accounting for 58% of the Ministry’s total allocation. 

The Department of Higher Education is responsible for higher education, technical education and training, etc., for students between 18-24 years of age. 

• Higher education qualifies as at least nine months of education, after the completion of 12 years of schooling or equivalent.

In 2017-18, the Department has been allocated Rs 33,330 crore, accounting for 42% of the Ministry’s total allocation. 

Overview of finances[1]

Budget Estimates 2017-18

The Ministry has been allocated Rs 79,686 crore in 2017-18.  This has been an 8% increase over the revised estimate of 2016-17.  The allocation constitutes 3.7% of the central government’s estimated expenditure for 2017-18.  Expenditure on education by the centre and the states as a proportion of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been around 3% during between 2008-09 and 2014-15.^[2]  The Committee constituted to examine the New Education Policy has proposed 6% of GDP as the minimum expenditure on education.[3] 

Within the Ministry, 58% of the total allocation is to the Department of School Education and Literacy and 42% is to the Department of Higher Education.  Table 1 provides the budget related figures for the Ministry.  For further details on the budgetary allocations, refer to the Annexure.

Table 1: Budget allocations for the MHRD (2017-18) (in Rs crore)

Note: BE – Budget Estimate; RE – Revised Estimates.

Sources: Demand for Grants, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget 2017-18, PRS

Figure 1 depicts the major heads under which the Ministry spends its funds (as a percentage of its total allocation). 

Figure 1: Top expenditure heads under the Ministry (2017-18)

Note: The category ‘Others’ includes other schemes and programmes under the Ministry which have an allocation of less than 2% of the total expenditure.

Sources: Expenditure Budget, Vol. 2, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2017-18; PRS.

 

Department of School Education and Literacy

In 2017-18, the Department of School Education and Literacy has been allocated Rs 46,356 crore, a 5.6% increase over the revised estimates of 2016-17.^[4]   In 2016-17, it was budgeted to spend Rs 43,554 crore.  Note that the budget estimate for 2017-18 exceeds the estimates of 2016-17 by Rs 2,802 crore.

Figure 2 below shows the allocation of the Department of School Education and Literacy over the past 10 years (2008-17).

Figure 2: Allocation to Department of School Education and Literacy (2008-17) (in Rs crore)

Note: Revised estimates have been used for 2016-17 and budget estimates for 2017-18.

Sources: Union Budgets, 2008-17; PRS.

In the past 10 years, the highest allocation was given in 2014-15 which Rs 55,115 crore.  Note that in 2015-16, the allocation was reduced by 25%.  This may be on account of a greater devolution of funds to the states in pursuance of the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission.

Table 2: Comparison of budget estimates and the actual expenditure  (2013-15) (in Rs crore)

Note: BE – Budget Estimate.

Sources: Union Budgets, 2015-17; PRS.

Table 2 indicates the actual allocation of the Department compared with the budget estimates of that year.  The utilisation has been over 80% of the budget estimates as seen in the table.

Table 3 presents details of the Department’s allocation in 2017-18.

Table 3: Allocation to the Department of School Education and Literacy in 2017-18 (in Rs crore)

Note: BE – Budget Estimate; RE – Revised Estimates.

Sources: Expenditure Budget, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget 2017-18; PRS.

• Allocation to Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) in 2017-18 was increased by 4.4% (as compared with revised estimates of 2016-17) to Rs 23,500 crore. Expenditure on Mid-Day Meal Scheme (MDMS) also increased by about 3% from the revised estimates of 2016-17.
• Scholarships increased by 611% in 2017-18 to a total allocation of Rs 602 crore from revised estimates of Rs 85 crore.

Figure 3 provides the major heads of financial allocation under this Department for 2017-18.  In 2017-18, expenditure on centrally sponsored schemes (SSA, MDMS, and RMSA) constitute 81% of the estimated spending of the Department of School Education and Literacy.

Figure 3: Major allocations for Department of School Education & Literacy (2017-18)

Sources: Expenditure Budget, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget, 2017-18; PRS.

• Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA): SSA has been implemented since 2000 to universalise elementary education and promote retention of children in the school system.  After the RTE Act, 2009 was enacted, SSA was subsumed under it.  RTE guarantees the right to free and compulsory elementary education for children between the ages of 6 and14 years in a neighbourhood school.[5]  Note that in 2016, Padhe Bharat Badhe Bharat was launched under SSA mainly to (i) improve language through early reading and writing with comprehension, and (ii) learn mathematics.

It has been observed that there exists a wide gap between demand and actual allocation for the SSA and RTE.[6]  For example, the BE for 2016-17 was Rs 22,500 crore as against the Department's request for Rs 55,000 crore.  Further, Standing Committees have recommended increased funding for the SSA and sufficient allocations for states requiring additional resources.[7]^,[8]

• Mid-Day Meal Scheme (MDMS): The MDMS targets children in the same age group as covered by the SSA (6 to 14 years).  In addition to promoting enrolment, retention and attendance by incentivising the children to come to school for meals, the scheme also aims to improve nutritional levels among children.  It covers children in government and government-aided schools. 

Committees have consistently highlighted low utilisation and lifting of food grains by states.  On average, less than 50% of the allotted food grains have been lifted by the states.¹⁶   The Committee also notes an infrastructural shortfall for the implementation of MDMS which needs to be addressed.  For example, lack of pucca buildings and separate toilet facilities for boys and girls.  Note that in the case of MDMS, there are no pending UCs.[9]

• Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA): The RMSA is aimed at secondary education (classes 9-12).  Its aims include achieving universal access to secondary education by 2017 and universal retention by 2020.^[10]  Following a Joint Review Mission by the government and the development partners of RMSA, it was discovered that RMSA has reached a stage where an outcome orientation is needed to bring in learner achievement as a major goal of RMSA.[11]  This was also to bring RMSA in step with SSA and ensure 100% transition of every child from the upper primary to secondary stage.  Note that under the RMSA Scheme, during 2015-16, an amount of Rs 3,562 crore out of a budgeted amount of Rs 3,565 crore was utilised, which comes to 99.9% utilisation.

Financial allocations to outcomes

• Enrolment, transition and dropout rates

Enrolment:  The GER is calculated as a percentage of total number of students enrolled in a level of education (school education in this case) divided by the total population within the relevant age group.  The GER at primary level is 100.1 % which has come down from 114% in 2008-09.[12]  This signifies a more age appropriate enrolment as a GER above 100% signifies that children not of the requisite age were also being enrolled.

Note that the GER at the upper primary (91.2%), secondary (78.5%) and senior secondary (54.2 %) level has increased over a five-year period (2008-09 to 2014-15).  However, except for primary education, India’s enrolment rate lags behind internationally when compared with countries like China, Russia, UK, Germany and USA.¹²  Note that the GER for secondary (78.5%) and senior secondary (54.2 %) level has increased over the last five-year period (2008-09 to 2014-15) but hasn’t met the RMSA targets.[13]

Figure 4: GER in school education

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

Transition: Transition is measured as the rate of transfer of students from one class or one level of education to the class or level above. 

According to the Ministry, transition rates of students are high in the lower levels of education such as elementary and secondary.  The transition of students from class 8 to 9 (elementary to secondary) is the highest (92%), followed by the transition from class 5 to 6 (primary to upper primary) at 90%.

However, the transition rate for higher levels, i.e. senior secondary and higher are lower in compassion.  The transition rate from class 10 to 11 (secondary to senior secondary) lags behind at 67%.¹²   Consequently, relatively fewer students reach class 11 which is seen in the GER in senior secondary level (class 11 and 12), being the lowest within school education. 

One of the factors affecting transition rates may be that under the RTE, education is provided only until class eight i.e. till upper primary level.  There is no legislation which mandates free and compulsory secondary education.

Further, with regard to access to secondary school, for every three upper primary schools there is one secondary school.¹²  According to RMSA statistics, four states where the ratio of upper primary school to secondary school is a cause of concern are Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Meghalaya.[14]

Dropouts: Dropout rate is the proportion of students dis-enrolling from school in a year.  Figure 5 depicts the dropout levels in school education (primary and secondary).

Figure 5: Dropout rate in school education (%)

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

The highest dropout rate is at 18% at the secondary level of school education.  Consequently, relatively fewer students reach class 11 which is seen in the GER in senior secondary level (class 11 and 12), being the lowest under school education. 

• Teacher related issues

Many committees over the years have highlighted teacher vacancies as a significant issue in elementary education.^3,15,8  Against a total of 19.14 lakh teacher positions sanctioned under SSA in 2011-12, only 12.01 lakh were recruited.  Further, approximately 4.5 lakh untrained teachers are operating in 19 states, as on February 2015.  Teacher training institutes such as DIETs are also experiencing many teacher vacancies.[15] It has also been observed that there are a large number of teacher vacancies under SSA, which adversely affects the implementation of the scheme.^[16]   

It has also been noted that the presence of para/temporary teachers instead of permanent teachers contributes to the deterioration of quality of education.  The Central Advisory Board of Education Committee commented that to ensure quality secondary education, para/temporary and contract teachers must be done away with.  Instead, fully qualified teachers with a complete salary and benefits must be hired.[17]

It has been recommended that appropriate professional development programmes for teachers be designed after carrying out formal training needs assessment of teachers.  Further, in classrooms, there is a need to introduce differentiated teaching that caters to multi-level learning environments.¹⁷

In the implementation of MDMS, it has been observed that the scheme has diverted the attention of teachers and students on activities related to it, rather than towards teaching and learning activities.  It has been recommended that teachers should not be burdened with the task of supervising cooking and serving of mid-day meals.³ 

• Learning outcomes in school education

The Economic Survey 2015-16 pointed out that the percentage of standard five students in government schools who are able to read a class two text has declined from 56.7% from 2007 to 42.2% in 2014.  The corresponding decline in private schools is from 69% to 62.5%.[18]  The National Achievement Survey in 2015 for class five has also revealed that performance of students, on an average, had gone down from the previous round of the survey conducted in 2014.[19]

Standing Committees have recommended reconsidering the automatic promotion of students till standard eight ( no detention policy), as this may prevent a child from working hard or eliminate motivation.[20]  In 2016, it was recommended that the policy of no detention should be upheld only till class five (age 11 years).³  This would reverse the existing policy of no detention till class eight (age 14 years).  Further, it was suggested that students should be given the choice to pick the difficulty level of the Mathematics and Science exams in class 10.

In light of the learning outcomes, The Ministry and NITI Aayog are jointly working on a School Education Quality Index with the goal of institutionalising a focus on improving education outcomes at the State/UT level.[21]

Department of Higher Education

The Department of Higher Education has been allocated Rs 33,330 crore in 2017-18, a 12.2% increase over the revised estimate of 2016-17.  Note that it has seen an increase of Rs 4,490 crore over the budget estimates of 2016-17.  Figure 6 depicts the allocation to the Department of Higher Education since 2006-07.  Between 2010-16, there has been an increase in the central budgetary allocation to higher education.    

Figure 6: Allocation to  the Department of Higher Education (2006-17) (in Rs crore)

Note: Revised estimates have been used for 2016-17 and budget estimates for 2017-18.

Sources: Union Budgets, 2006-17; PRS.

Table 4 indicates the actual allocation of the Department compared to the budget estimates of that year.  The utilisation has been over 80% of the budget estimates as seen in the table.

Table 4: Comparison of budget estimates and the actual expenditure  (2013-16) (in Rs crore)

Note: BE – Budget Estimate.

Sources: Union Budgets, 2015-17; PRS.

Table 5: Demand for grants (2017-18) for the Department of Higher Education (in Rs crore)

Sources: Expenditure Budget, Vol. 2, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget 2017-18; PRS.

• Expenditure on Digital India e-learning has been estimated at Rs 497 crore, which is down by 3.8% over the revised estimates of 2016-17.
• The allocation for Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) has been estimated at Rs 7,856 crore in 2017-18, National Institutes of Technology (NITs) at Rs 3,440 crore and Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) at Rs 1,030 crore.
• The funding allocation for Rashtriya Uchchtar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA) has remained the same this year at Rs 1,300 crore (from the 2016-17 budget allocation) and has seen no change in its allocation.
• It has been observed that there has been underutilisation of funds by central and state universities, including unspent balances lying with central universities.⁶ Committees have stressed on the need to curb delays on the part of the UGC and the MHRD in disbursing budgetary allocations to the various universities of higher education.[22] 
• Committees have noted that such a consistent trend of unspent balances is leading to lower allocations against the MHRD’s demands for funds, resulting in a ‘vicious circle’.[23] For example, Rs 689 crore was left unspent with the autonomous bodies which get one of the highest allocations under higher education in 2016.[24]  This leads to a significant gap between the proposed demand and the allocation of budget to MHRD as well.[25] 

Figure 7 below provides the major heads of financial allocation under the Department for the year 2017-18.

Figure 7: Major heads of expenditure for the Department of Higher Education

Sources: Expenditure Budget, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget, 2017-18; PRS.

Issues in the higher education sector

• Enrolment levels

In India, GER in higher education has more than doubled over a period of 11 years, going from 9% in 2002-03 to 24% in 2014-15.[26] 

Figure 8: GER in higher education (2007-13)

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

A GER of 24% implies that roughly 24% of people who should be enrolled in universities (as per the target age-group of 18-23 years) are actually enrolled.  The GER for higher education in India is fairly low compared to other countries such as the UK and USA, as seen in Figure 9 below. 

Figure 9: International comparison of GER in higher education (2012)

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

• Regulatory issues in higher education

Indian higher education is regulated by a multiplicity of regulatory agencies, with overlapping mandates.  These bodies are the University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the various professional councils.  Citing overregulation and under governance, various committees have highlighted the need for an overarching regulatory body by subsuming the multiple existing regulatory bodies.[27]^,[28]  Such a body would be responsible for monitoring standards and licensing accreditation bodies.

Recently, the TSR Subramanian Committee report (2016) on the New Education Policy also recommended bringing in the National Higher Education Promotion and Management Act which would replace the existing separate laws governing individual regulators in higher education.³  In the Union Budget of 2017-18, the Finance Minister mentioned that reforms would be undertaken concerning the functioning of UGC.[29]

• Quality standards in higher education

There are two accrediting institutions in higher education– namely National Board of Accreditation (NBA) established by AICTE, and the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) established by UGC.  Currently, in terms of the quality of universities, out of 759 universities, only three universities have been given an ‘A+’, the highest grade and 74 universities have been given an ‘A’ grade by the NAAC.[30]

Accreditation is used to determine eligibility for grants of different kinds.  However, there is a need to reorient the purpose of accreditation, as one involving assessment of quality of the institution.³  A National Accreditation Board could be set up subsuming the NAAC and the NBA.  This Board will provide oversight, define methodology, undertake research on accreditation and set the standards to be followed.

Note that India Rankings 2016 was conducted for the first time in 2016.  More than 3,500 institutions participated in the exercise and ranks were released in four categories of institutions: universities, engineering, management and pharmacy.[31]

• Fee Structure in higher education

It has been observed that many private institutions of higher education charge exorbitant fees.  In the absence of well-defined norms, fees charged by such universities have remained high.[32]  UGC regulates fees for courses offered in deemed universities, to an extent.  They state that the fees charged shall be directly linked to the cost of running the course and the institution shall ensure non-commercialisation of education.  In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that the fees charged by private unaided educational institutes could be regulated.[33]  Also, while banning capitation fee (fees exceeding the tuition fee), it allowed institutes to charge a reasonable surplus.

• Profit motive and private investment in higher education

Committee recommendations have not encouraged for-profit private educational institutions.²⁷  However, it has been recommended that it is essential to stimulate private investment in higher education to extend educational opportunities and private intervention would be key in bridging the gap in investment from the government in the education sector.  Note that in 2016, a scheme to establish 20 Indian Institutes of Information Technology (IIITs), on a not-for-profit Public Private Partnership basis was approved.

 

 

 

 

Annexure

Union Budget, 2017-18

Table 6: Allocations to the Ministry of Human Resource Development for 2017-18 (in Rs crore)

Sources:  Demand for Grants, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget, 2017-18; PRS.

State wise indicators on school and higher education

Table 7: State wise key indicators on school education

Note: GER: Gross Enrolment Ratio; GPI: Gender Parity Index; PTR: Pupil-Teacher Ratio

Sources: Flash Statistics, District Information System for Education, 2015-16; PRS.

Table 8: State wise key indicators on higher education

Note: GER: Gross Enrolment Ratio; GPI: Gender Parity Index; PTR: Pupil-Teacher Ratio

Sources: All India Survey on Higher Education, 2014-15; PRS.

Graphical representation of the status of education

Figure 10: GER across different education levels

 

Source: Education statistics at a glance, 2016, Ministry of Human Resource Development; PRS.

Figure 11: Changes in GER in school education (2005-2015)

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

Note: Enrolment over 100 % as seen in primary education signifies that children below and above the age of six are being enrolled at the primary education level.

Figure 12: GER across education levels: India vs other countries (2012)

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

Figure 13:  Gender wise GER (2014-15)

Sources:  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016; PRS.

Figure 14: Transition rates in school education (2014-15) (in %)

Sources:  Flash Statistics, District Information System for Education, 2015-16; PRS.

 

Figure 15: Distribution of students by type of institution attended (2014-15)

Sources: Educational Statistics at a glance, 2016, Ministry of Human Resource Development; PRS.

 

[1]  Demand for Grants, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union Budget, 2017-18.

[2]  Economic Survey, 2013-14, Ministry of Finance, http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf.

[3]  “Report of the Committee for Evolution of the New Education Policy”, Ministry of Human Resource Development, April 30, 2016, http://www.nuepa.org/New/download/NEP2016/ReportNEP.pdf

[4]  Expenditure Budget, Vol. 2, Union Budget 2017-18.

[5]  The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009.

[6] “280^th Report: Demands for Grants 2016-17 (Demand No. 51) of the Department of School Education & Literacy”, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, April 27, 2016

[7]  “250^th Report: Action Taken Report on 244^th Report on Demands for Grants 2012-13”, Department of School Education and Literacy, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, February 26, 2013.

[8]  “255^th Report: Action Taken Report on 250^th Report on Demands for Grants 2016-17”, Department of School Education and Literacy, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, December 16, 2016.

[9] Outcome Budget, 2016-17, Ministry of Human Resource Development, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/Outcome_16-17.pdf

[10]  Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, Ministry of Human Resource Development, http://rmsaindia.gov.in/en/component/rmsastates/?view=rmsastates&Itemid=130&id=india

[11]  Fourth Joint Review Mission, Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, 2014, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/4th%20JRM%20AM%202014%2008%2023%20FINAL%20_2_.pdf

[12]  Education statistics at a glance, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2016, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/statistics/ESG2016_0.pdf

[13]  “School Education in India, Flash Statistics”, U-DISE 2014-15, Ministry of Human Resource Development, http://www.dise.in/Downloads/Publications/Documents/U-DISE-SchoolEducationInIndia-2014-15.pdf.

[14]  Trends under RMSA, Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, http://rmsaindia.gov.in/images/Trends_and_Indicators_under_RMSA.pdf

[15]  “253rd Report: Demands for Grants 2013-14, Demand No. 57”, Department of School Education and Literacy, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, April 26, 2013.

[16]  “283^rd Report: The Implementation of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and Mid-Day-Meal Scheme’, Department of School Education and Literacy, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, December 15, 2016.

[17]  “Report of the CABE Committee on Girls’ education and common school system”, Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2005, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/Girls%20Education.pdf

[18]  Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance, http://indiabudget.nic.in/budget2016-2017/es2014-15/echapter-vol2.pdf

[19]  National Achievement Survey, Class V (Cycle 3) Subject Wise Reports, http://www.ncert.nic.in/departments/nie/esd/pdf/NationalReport_subjectwise.pdf

[20]  “Report of CABE Sub Committee on Assessment on implementation of CCE and no detention provision”, Ministry of Human Resource Development, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/AssmntCCE.pdf

[21]   Unstarred Question no. 3218, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Lok Sabha, December 5, 2016.

[22]  Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance, http://indiabudget.nic.in/budget2016-2017/es2014-15/echapter-vol2.pdf

[23]  “Demands for Grants 2013-14 (Demand No. 58) of the Department of Higher Education, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, May 3, 2013, http://164.100.47.5/newcommittee/reports/EnglishCommittees/Committee%20on%20HRD/256.pdf.

[24]  “279^th Report: Demands for Grants 2016-17 (Demand No. 52) of the Department of Higher Education”, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, April 27, 2016.

[25]  Outcome budget, 2016-17, Ministry of Human Resource Development, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/Outcome_16-17.pdf , http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/Outcome2016-17.pdf

[26]  All India Survey on Higher Education, 2014-15, Ministry of Human Resource and Development, Department of Higher Education, http://aishe.nic.in/aishe/viewDocument.action?documentId=206.

[27]  “ Report of the Committee to Advise on Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education”, 2009, http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/document-reports/YPC-Report.pdf.

[28]  “Report to the Nation: 2006-2009”, National Knowledge Commission, March 2009, http://www.aicte-india.org/downloads/nkc.pdf.

[29]  Budget Speech, 2017-18, Union Budget, http://indiabudget.nic.in/bspeecha.asp

[30]  Accreditation status, National Assessment and Accreditation Council, http://web5.kar.nic.in/naac_ec/NAAC_accreditlist_pdf.aspx.

[31]  Year End Review, 2016, Initiatives and Achievements of Ministry of Human Resource Development, December 30, 2017, Press Information Bureau.

[32]  “236th Report on the Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical Educational Institutions, Medical Educational Institutions and Universities Bill, 2010”, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, May 30, 2011.

[33]  TMA Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka & Ors [(1994)2SCC195].

 

DISCLAIMER: This document is being furnished to you for your information.  You may choose to reproduce or redistribute this report for non-commercial purposes in part or in full to any other person with due acknowledgement of PRS Legislative Research (“PRS”).  The opinions expressed herein are entirely those of the author(s).  PRS makes every effort to use reliable and comprehensive information, but PRS does not represent that the contents of the report are accurate or complete.  PRS is an independent, not-for-profit group.  This document has been prepared without regard to the objectives or opinions of those who may receive it.